Velkyn, I say I don’t want there to be a creator because I don’t want there to be a hell, and that is not BS, I really don’t want there to be a hell, I assume you don’t want there to be a hell either?

I know what you are saying, but we may be living in that hell.

You are against evolution, but why? Genesis says that the sun was created on the 4th day, and that night and day were created on the first day. The genesis story gives no hint that the person writing it knew anything about how the universe really formed, or had even a clue about what causes day. He put water above the sun. He put the sun in the upper atmosphere, where the fowls can fly. The bible is bereft of scientific truth. You know why?

Scientific knowledge is something that you cannot fake. It takes thousands of years of human intellect to mash our way out of the ignorance box that we were born into. There is no magic way of intuiting what created us (and how), because it does not talk to us. The only way to find out, is to make very large telescopes, and computers and have very large institutions funding them.

Biblical prophesy is also something which Christians resort to. Prophesy is something you also cannot really fake in great detail (ahead of time). I can prophesy that one king will come after another, and one kingdom will be greater than another, but I cannot fake the dates of earthquakes and volcanoes. If God wanted to show us that he was real, he would give the dates of tsunamis, volcanoes and meteorite strikes. But... he doesn't.. because these dates cannot be faked. So, what, we are supposed to believe a few lame, vague prophecies that may have been written after the events?

You are showing signs of accepting Christianity because you think it's the only one on offer. Many other religions have hells. The Christian Genesis story shows beyond any doubt, that the OT is bereft of real knowledge, so why would you then attack evolution? To bolster your belief in something that cannot be true?

If I were you, I'd take a close look at Galatians, and wonder why Paul was so sure that Jesus implied that you should not to follow the law, when James was so sure you should. Now, I can't be certain that Galatians is not just another fake book. It's tempting to believe that it was written by someone who was there at the time. But all that early writing could have been constructed by later writers. Paul can never quote Jesus, even when he is making an argument that you should not follow the law. Why is that? Why can Paul never quote Jesus, when Jesus is such a treasure trove of quotes? Why can John never quote Jesus? Surely an eye-witness should have got one quote right?

The most logical answer is that the quotes had not been invented, yet. It is possible that the epistles do, in fact, pre-date the creation of the quotable Jesus.

Jesus was not enough of an authority to convince the people he knew, to abandon the law. Surely he should have been more impressive than that? Surely he would not need a false prophet (Paul) to sort that out? And yet we have the gospel of Matthew, telling us to keep strictly to the law, as a way to get to heaven. Somehow, a book which is inconsistent with grace, is staring you in the face, but you cannot see it. How, and why, was it included in Christianity? And why the fuck did Paul not know any quotes from it?

If God wanted to show us that he was real, he would give the dates of tsunamis, volcanoes and meteorite strikes. But... he doesn't.. because these dates cannot be faked. So, what, we are supposed to believe a few lame, vague prophecies that may have been written after the events?

[bold mine]Damn straight. Whenever religious prophecies get specific, they are wrong. How many times have religions predicted the exact date of the end of the world in the past 2000 years? And how many times have they been right?

Wouldn't it be a wonderful witness to the glory of the lord if it said in the bible to evacuate the coastal areas on X date (the day before last year's big tsunami) in Japan? Everyone in the world would become Christians immediately, praising the one true god for his foresight and thoughtfulness. The bible would actually be a useful document.

Oh, yeah, I guess that shows that an all-knowing god had nothing to do with the bible. The people who really wrote the bible didn't know about tsunamis, or about Japan, for that matter.

The people back then thought that natural disasters were random acts of a vengeful god or demon--nothing to be done but sacrifice some innocent living thing and pray that you don't get in god's way when he is in one of his moods.

Now we have scientists who can actually tell us the dates when a hurricane or whatever is going to hit land, or when a volcano is going to erupt, when to evacuate, and how to be safer during various natural disasters.

Allow me to take this one gem from the huge list of gems you provided on the previous page (I simply don't have the time or wherewithal to handle more than that):

"There is much variation in bacteria and fruit flies. There are many mutations. But they never turn into anything new. They always remain bacteria or always remain fruit flies. Many years of study of countless generations of bacteria and fruit flies all over the world shows that evolution is not happening."

Organized religion is simply tribalism with a side order of philosophical wankery, and occasionally a baseball bat to smash the kneecaps of anyone who doesn't show proper deference to the tribe's chosen totem.

However, I read the section on Intelligent Design and immediately note that you have basically said, the human body doesn’t work “perfectly” therefore it evolved. You missed the point completely that the very existence of living things, ie they work well enough to live and procreate, proves the existance of God. The flaws in the systems are so minor that they are negligible compared to the parts of the systems that do work.

I have flaws in my dna. I won't lie. It is most likely due to mutations brought about by centuries of drinking and drug abuse..However, if people were to be so kind, I could live a perfectly happy life even with my flaws. The fact that I have flaws actually disproves god, because why would god create such a flawed person? Also, one of my flaws is debilitating. It was caused by social trauma when I was growing up developing my brain... I don't believe any sort of god would have planned for people to live this way. And no, I don't disbelieve because I might hate god. I find it very difficult to hate anything, and people have given me more than enough reason to do just that...

Quote

By the way you might want to answer the question: Do I want there to be a creator and if not, why not?

I would like there to be a creator. That way, I could live again. However, if what makes me 'me' is simply a matter of 'chemistry', then I may indeed live again anyway, without knowing it. Therefore to me, it doesn't really matter if god exists or not. It would be nice if a good god existed, but looking at people, eh, I'd rather take my chances at being a fish sometime down the road...

Logged

"If you find yourself reaching for the light, first realize that it has already touched your finger.""If I were your god, I would have no reason for judgement, and you have all told endless lies about me. Wait - you do already. I am not amused by your ignorance, thoughtlessness, and shallow mind."

..what's this 'bathroom' you speak of? I've been peeing on the side of buildings..

Logged

"If you find yourself reaching for the light, first realize that it has already touched your finger.""If I were your god, I would have no reason for judgement, and you have all told endless lies about me. Wait - you do already. I am not amused by your ignorance, thoughtlessness, and shallow mind."

"If you find yourself reaching for the light, first realize that it has already touched your finger.""If I were your god, I would have no reason for judgement, and you have all told endless lies about me. Wait - you do already. I am not amused by your ignorance, thoughtlessness, and shallow mind."

Coke comes from coca leaves. Poppy plants are the source for opium, morphine, and heroin. Not that it makes much of a difference for purposes of this discussion, that is. I'm sure Satan made both of them.

Logged

[On how kangaroos could have gotten back to Australia after the flood]: Don't kangaroos skip along the surface of the water? --Kenn

No, 'getting drunk' back then was an acronym for 'stoner!!' So Noah must have brought at least one poppy plant and coca plant so he could remain sane during his 150+ day float with his inbreeding kids and nagging from the wife..

Logged

"If you find yourself reaching for the light, first realize that it has already touched your finger.""If I were your god, I would have no reason for judgement, and you have all told endless lies about me. Wait - you do already. I am not amused by your ignorance, thoughtlessness, and shallow mind."

Considering the amount of stinking waste the animals and people were producing in that sealed-up, dark, hot hellhole of a boat. Plus they were being tossed around 24-7 like Dolly Parton's boobies on a zero gravity see-saw.

How come they don't have a Noah's Ark Barf Bucket Adventure Ride and Petting Zoo at one of those Christian amusement parks? I would be happy to help design it.

Welcome back, TruthSearcher. There's no need to apologize; life has any number of more urgent and pleasant things to offer than this forum.

That said, it's been over a year since this thread was active. Posting on a topic that's been dead for more than a month or so is considered "thread necromancy" and discouraged. Feel free to start a new one on the same topic, or find a current one to comment on.

Hi, I'm the anonymous poster, actually I just sent this email to the moderator and they posted it for me and invited me to sign up so I have, especially since so many of you responded to the post.

Anyway, I get the feeling that you guys generally think God is an imperfect pathetic sadist. So based on this opinion of him you say he doesn't exist because you don't want such a God to exist, but your opinion of him doesn't change the truth regarding his existence or non existence. Who cares what you think the creator should be like, or what kind of creation they should have made, lets just look at the evidence, for example, life comes from life (we all know this to be currently true), so until someone shows this scientific law to be false then we should be thinking that the first living cell must have come from a living being regardless of how hopeless we think that being is. Please be aware that our opinion of "God" has a huge bearing on how we conduct research and we need to be open and honest about how it affects our research.

You seem to have a misunderstanding of what science states regarding life. There is no "law" regarding how life may or may not have arisen. Evolution is the explantion for the diversity of life after it got here. Abiogensis is an hypothesis regarding life's origins. Now, the burden of proof lies upon the one making the claim. Instead of just pretending to know "it had to have come from an intelligent designer" you should admit that you don't know, just like those in the science field do when they do not have enough information, and go do some actual science. Oh, but whoops that's right, there is no demonstrable evidence for some 'creator', and an argument from ignorance fallacy does not get you to "God did it" in any logical way. It is irrational to make such claims. Thus, admitting you don't know is the only honest option. But of course, that probably makes you very uncomfortable doesn't it? Still, superstition (or claiming a mystery to solve another mystery) is futile.

Doesn't that just suck when we don't know things?

Why do you get to just pretend that you know the answer when you don't?